User talk:M Jiang M

Problems in Effective Potential
I think there are a few problems existing in the entry, effective potential.

First, I think it is not suitable to define potential or potential energy as a mathematical expression. It is a physical quantity, so it would be better if we define it as 'energy' or in other more intuitive ways.

Second, in the introductory part, it mentions effective potential has applications in many fields, including classical mechanics, relativity mechanics and so on. However, in the examples and mathematical formula below, we could only see information for the classical part. To extend the definition, we can introduce effective potential in multiple aspects and give more examples according to the introductory part.

Third, there is a red link in this entry, the 'centrifugal potential energy', which means that the link doesn't exist. I do not know if the linked content has been deleted, but this needs to be fixed by either deleting the hyperlink or creating a new entry for 'centrifugal potential energy'.

Plus, I also agree with the view in the talk page, that potential is different from potential energy. From the introduction in this entry, I think the definition is more suitable for 'effective potential energy'. M_Eva_M (talk) 02:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Effective potential
I think there are a few problems existing in the entry, effective potential. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_potential

First, I think it is not suitable to define potential or potential energy as a mathematical expression. It is a physical quantity, so it would be better if we define it as 'energy' or in other more intuitive ways.

Second, in the introductory part, it mentions effective potential has applications in many fields, including classical mechanics, relativity mechanics and so on. However, in the examples and mathematical formula below, we could only see information for the classical part. To extend the definition, we can introduce effective potential in multiple aspects and give more examples according to the introductory part.

Third, there is a red link in this entry, the 'centrifugal potential energy', which means that the link doesn't exist. I do not know if the linked content has been deleted, but this needs to be fixed by either deleting the hyperlink or creating a new entry for 'centrifugal potential energy'.

Plus, I also agree with the view in the talk page, that potential is not the same as potential energy. From the introduction in this entry, I think the definition is more suitable for 'effective potential energy'.

M_Eva_M (talk) 02:43, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

EG: Very nice, Zhongling, and very thorough! FYI, the red links mean that the writer believes there should be a Wikipedia article for that topic but that one does not yet exist. The link serves as a marker of intention and a request for some reader to create the article. (Might this be a good topic for your project?) WritingMan (talk) 15:57, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, M Jiang M, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

I updated the dead link in the word 'cloning' in citation #74. Here is the link to the word: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloning M_Eva_M (talk) 18:47, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Update dead link in 'cloning'
I updated the dead link in the word 'cloning' in citation #74. Here is the link to the word: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloning M_Eva_M (talk) 18:49, 19 March 2018 (UTC)